DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Preliminary Amendment
2. The preliminary amendment filed on December 12, 2024 has been entered in the above-identified application. Claims 4-17 are amended. Claims 1-17 are pending and under consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
3. Claims 1-13, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Isozuki et al. (WO 2021/241427).
In the rejection set forth below, US 2023/0243106 A1 is used as the equivalent of WO 2021/241427. The column and line numbers in the body of the rejection refer to that in the US document.
Isozuki et al. disclose a heat-sealable paper (equivalent to the heat sealable paper of the claimed invention) that is excellent in impact resistance and workability. The heat-sealable paper comprises at least one heat-sealable layer (equivalent to the heat sealable layer of the claimed invention) on at least one surface of a paper substrate (equivalent to the paper of the claimed invention). Isozuki et al. also disclose a packaging bag using the heat-sealable paper (meeting the limitations of claim 17). The paper substrate substantially consists of raw material pulp containing softwood pulp as a main component, wherein the raw material pulp constituting the paper substrate is unbleached kraft pulp (meeting the limitations of claim 10). The paper substrate has a basis weight of 120 g/m2 or less (meeting the limitations of claims 13 and 15). The heat-sealable layer comprises a water-dispersible resin binder, and wherein the water-dispersible resin binder is at least one selected from the group consisting of an ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer, an ethylene-(meth)acrylic acid copolymer (equivalent to the olefin-unsaturated carboxylic acid copolymer of the claimed invention), and a styrene/butadiene copolymer (meeting the limitations of claim 6, 7, and 8). The heat-sealable layer further comprises a lubricant (meeting the limitations of claim 2) wherein the lubricant is at least one selected from the group consisting of polyethylene wax, carnauba wax, and paraffin wax (meeting the limitations of claim 3) and wherein a content of the lubricant in the heat-sealable layer is 0.2 mass% or more and 30 mass% or less (meeting the limitations of claim 4).
(See Abstract and paragraphs 0001, 0009- 0017, 0027, and 0028).
With regards to the longitudinal and transverse geometric mean of a tear index, the burst index, and the heat sealing peel strength of the heat sealable paper, the glass transition temperature of the water-dispersible resin binder, Canadian standard freeness of pulp constituting the paper substrate, the value (Clark stiffness/basis weight) obtained by dividing a longitudinal and transverse geometric mean of Clark stiffness, and the piercing strength of the heat-sealable paper, the Examiner takes the position that such property limitations are inherent in the heat sealable paper and the paper substrate given that the heat sealable paper and the paper substrate as taught by Isozuki et al. is identical to that the claimed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
4. Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isozuki et al. (WO 2021/241427).
With regards to the longitudinal and transverse geometric mean of a tear index, the burst index, and the heat sealing peel strength of the heat sealable paper, the glass transition temperature of the water-dispersible resin binder, Canadian standard freeness of pulp constituting the paper substrate, the value (Clark stiffness/basis weight) obtained by dividing a longitudinal and transverse geometric mean of Clark stiffness, and the piercing strength of the heat-sealable paper, the basis weight of the heat-sealable layer, and the use of an extensible paper, the Examiner would like to point out that workable physical properties and concentrations are deemed to be obvious routine optimizations to one of ordinary skill in the art, motivated by the desire to obtain the required properties.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEEBA AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-1504. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7am-6pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, CALLIE SHOSHO can be reached at 571-272-1123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHEEBA AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights